Jump to content
The Official Site of the Vancouver Canucks
Canucks Community

[PGT] Tampa Bay Lightning at Vancouver Canucks | Mar. 13, 2022

Rate this topic


-Vintage Canuck-

Recommended Posts

12 hours ago, Kragar said:

Interesting idea.

 

I'm torn over reviews in general.  The delays suck, but it's important to get things right.

 

What really gets my goat is when they miss an offside, and the team takes a penalty trying to defend. If the offside was called correctly, no penalty would have happened, but the offside isn't reviewable in that case.

 

Oh well, sh!# happened, better luck Tuesday. And, hopefully better start, too.

I'd rather they err on the side of plays being onside, because they can be challenged after. 

We just had an incorrect offside call cost us a great scoring chance the other night (which nothing can be done about)

 

Maybe coaches should be allowed to challenge a penalty as well as a goal if they suspect the play was offside ? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, -Vintage Canuck- said:

 

That's a lot of players looking for spots on the roster.  It's good news overall, we could tighten that top 9 if Sutter can regain his step. But this is like training camp  who do you keep? I'm guessing a few of them will end up in Abbotsford for conditioning.  But that's a lot of RD.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, DS4quality said:

That's a lot of players looking for spots on the roster.  It's good news overall, we could tighten that top 9 if Sutter can regain his step. But this is like training camp  who do you keep? I'm guessing a few of them will end up in Abbotsford for conditioning.  But that's a lot of RD.

Who do you slot in between Burroughs and Poolman is the question?

 

Id have to go with Burroughs to be honest. His play was more consistent.

 

Between Dickinson and Chiasson I still go with Dickinson even though he’s had a bad season. Maybe the time off can be a reset for him.

  • Thanks 1
  • Vintage 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, DeNiro said:

Who do you slot in between Burroughs and Poolman is the question?

 

Id have to go with Burroughs to be honest. His play was more consistent.

 

Between Dickinson and Chiasson I still go with Dickinson even though he’s had a bad season. Maybe the time off can be a reset for him.

Hmm, Poolman was playing pretty good before he went down, his game started turning around pretty good after the coaching changes.  

 

I'm curious as to whether they carry an extra forward or defenseman, especially if Sutter can play.  

 

Any chance Höglander goes to Abbotsford? I'd prefer he stays but space is limited. Maybe some of them will do the Kucherov LTIR

 

Just to mess with everything I hope Michael Ferlund starts skating.

  • Haha 2
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Muttley said:

Dickinson Can't seem to break these F/O numbers.  Not horrid but never above 50% for a year.

 

https://www.foxsports.com/nhl/jason-dickinson-player-stats?category=faceoffs&seasonType=reg

 

Be very much worthwhile playing him if he could somehow start learning the role of enforcer a little.  Get mean when it's called for.  Get into the scrums and muck it up.

 

We really need that down the stretch as many of the teams we're playing are flipping on the desperation switch just like we need to.  

 

I like Dickinson over Chiasson as well because he's generally better with the puck and has a far, far better skating stride.  Bruce Boudreau must be thinking are is some

 

minor moves to be made to stop a few of the bad habits that are creeping into our game, particularly, early on in games. He addressed the bad starts in his presser.

 

A healthy, happy, determined Petey is vital to our chances of a run to the playoffs. Really helps Miller on the power play to have him on it.  

 

 

Petey takes tough matchups five on five too.  Petey is a super key player for us.  Only Demko and Hughes are more key.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, -Vintage Canuck- said:

 

I bet it's just a ruse they are going to trade him, just like a lot of people on this forum wanted to a couple of months ago.

 

We sure missed him tonight, Vasy played great so did Demko, the refs were, well, could have been better.

 

Garland looked great, that icing maneuver was something.

GCG 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, DeNiro said:

Who do you slot in between Burroughs and Poolman is the question?

 

Id have to go with Burroughs to be honest. His play was more consistent.

 

Between Dickinson and Chiasson I still go with Dickinson even though he’s had a bad season. Maybe the time off can be a reset for him.

I think Schenn has done such an amazing job winning a spot on the starting 6. I didn't think hed ever be in a postion to take Burroughs or Poolman's spot so huge kudos to him.

That crosscheckign penalty was BS last game.  I never want him to lose the physicality.  We need more of that snarl and I can see why you said Burroughs over Poolman

 

I think we are in a pretty good spot now

 

Hammer is starting to play well, Schenn has exceeded expectations. OEL and Myers dropped off a bit. Hughes migth be getting tired.  Wuld be nice to inject some upgrades over Hunt and even out the ice time a bit

 

If Schenn wasn't playing as well as he has, I would have taken him out and put in Poolman and Burroughs over him and then put Schenn in against bigger stronger teams and Burroughs/Poolman against fast less physical teams but now, it's really hard to take Luke out of the line up

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Hairy Kneel said:

As long as we're running 2 mini me defenseman back there were in for a tough go. Guys like Hedman just strolled in. Opposing team just aren't afraid of coming into our zone. 

We need more protection from that Hunt position. 

Hving Burroughs and Poolman back should help

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Alflives

 

some catfood for thought as you hammer on your calculator…

 

“it'll be fascinating to see what the Canucks do about their goaltending when that back-to-back set comes up. Thatcher Demko is an impressive 9-2-1 since the All-Star Break. But somewhat ironically, his 29-save performance in the loss against the Lightning on Sunday is the first time in five games that he has finished with a save percentage of over .900 in an individual game.

Demko's averages since All Star aren't much different from his full-season numbers — a .916 save percentage and 2.66 goals-against average. But he has played the third-most minutes since All-Star weekend — behind only Winnipeg's Connor Hellebuyck and Ilya Sorokin of the Islanders, and four minutes ahead of Jacob Markstrom.”

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Darth Canuck said:

unpopular opinion: I think Demko needs a break. He’s not as sharp as before. We need to plug our nose and put Halak in for a game or two…(just after the Devils…)

Yes.  Demko does need a break.

 

But not replaced with Halak... better to bring up Spencer Martin... Canucks cannot afford to let a game go down the toilet.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Canucks missed having Pettersson... he opens up the defense on the PP because he is such a threat.

 

They cheat towards him so they can block his one timer and that gives either Miller or Bo room.

 

Plus he has been great recently on the PK and his line is playing well even strength.

 

When he is playing well even strength, the D-pairings against the other lines are weaker because they have to match him.  And that opens it up for Miller and company.

 

Plus he usually draws a penalty every game... or makes the Refs think they need to call one later because they didn't call the one when he got hooked or impeded.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • -DLC- unpinned and unfeatured this topic
9 minutes ago, philtbc829 said:

well at least it wasn't a blow out...and the only reason for that was Demko......I'm sure he is gettng tired of carrying this team on his back....ffs

Not sure what you were watching but outside of the first half of the first period, they all played their hearts out. We had lots of grade A chances and were robbed by the best goalie in the league. I was proud of them (aside from the first 10 min). They were in it to win it and it would have gone to OT if it wasn’t for the refs disallowing that second. 
 

We lost 2-1 people, not 5-1 !!!!

  • Cheers 1
  • Sad 1
  • Upvote 1
  • Vintage 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, grandmaster said:

Not sure what you were watching but outside of the first half of the first period, they all played their hearts out. We had lots of grade A chances and were robbed by the best goalie in the league. I was proud of them (aside from the first 10 min). They were in it to win it and it would have gone to OT if it wasn’t for the refs disallowing that second. 
 

We lost 2-1 people, not 5-1 !!!!

I agree. They battled valiantly.  Even though they did allow Tampa to dictate the game early.  The only problem now of course is that moral victories do nothing for us.

 

Criminal that the goal was waved off because of a whistle happy ref.  There should be a rule that the league can phone down to "correct" an early whistle. Not for other situations, but on a goal scored, where its clear that the only reason the whistle was blown, just before a puck goes in, was because the ref lost sight......not because the puck didn't cross the line, or the net was knocked off, or a player covered the puck with his hand, or any other number of reasons.

  • Cheers 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Jayinblack said:

I'd rather they err on the side of plays being onside, because they can be challenged after. 

We just had an incorrect offside call cost us a great scoring chance the other night (which nothing can be done about)

 

Maybe coaches should be allowed to challenge a penalty as well as a goal if they suspect the play was offside ? 

Yep, basically what I was thinking.  I don't expect it to happen though.

 

And yeah, I was pissed about that offside call.  I thought for sure it was onside before I saw the replay (although perhaps some homer glasses there),  and of course was quickly vindicated.  The whistle shouldn't have blown, and it should have played out like you say. Just another mistake.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...